Jump to content

Giorgi Chirgadze, Jhonny Atreaga, Jose Angulo


  • Please log in to reply
137 replies to this topic

#121
Paul Nasta

Paul Nasta

    Player/Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,069 posts
  • Location:Long Island
  • Supports:Old Boys, SBU, RBNY, USMNT
So 24 out of 30 roster spots are now filled, what happens with the other 6 spots? Are there some trialists who they haven't decided on yet, or are they going to leave these spots open and take the allocation money?

#122
MetroFanatic

MetroFanatic

    Choose Metro.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,262 posts
  • Location:MetroFanatic.com
  • Supports:Metro

So 24 out of 30 roster spots are now filled, what happens with the other 6 spots? Are there some trialists who they haven't decided on yet, or are they going to leave these spots open and take the allocation money?

If you count Rodgers, this is 25 filled. Backe said he wants to go with 25-26.

http://www.metrofana...team/status.jsp
MetroFanatic.com. Metro Forever.

#123
JayDelight729

JayDelight729

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,017 posts
  • Location:The Old El Pastor Parking Lot
  • Supports:Metro

If you count Rodgers, this is 25 filled. Backe said he wants to go with 25-26.

http://www.metrofana...team/status.jsp


Probably wants to add a couple players during the season / not have to trade guys away to add guys later on.

Don't agree with the strategy.

"Obviously, I want to make a living (in soccer), to say the least," he said. "There's so much you can accomplish in the soccer world, and right now I'm focused on having a good season with the Red Bulls. Ultimately, our goal is to win the MLS Cup, and I see no reason why we can't." - #4 Tyler Adams


#124
Voice of Reason II

Voice of Reason II

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,065 posts

If you count Rodgers, this is 25 filled. Backe said he wants to go with 25-26.

http://www.metrofana...team/status.jsp

To be honest, given the Backe Bench philosophy, not keeping young talent on board only to see their hopes wither is probaly a kinder, gentler side of the beast than pretending they are part of the team.

Not saying I agree with the philosophy, but at least it is not disingenuous.

#125
GMoney

GMoney

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,118 posts
  • Supports:New York Red Bulls

Probably wants to add a couple players during the season / not have to trade guys away to add guys later on.

Don't agree with the strategy.


Red Bulls have invested in brand new orange cones rather than fill out hte roster with young talent.

The New York Red Bulls previously kicked around Major League Soccer as the MetroStars with limited success. But after transforming under a new banner in 2005, the Red Bulls have become a force to be reckoned with in the Eastern Conference. The club has made leaps of progress since its previous incarnation and now has its focus on bringing the league title to New York. Grab your New York Red Bulls soccer jersey and other gear here at MLSGear.com.


#126
Voice of Reason II

Voice of Reason II

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,065 posts

Red Bulls have invested in brand new orange cones rather than fill out hte roster with young talent.

That's been debatable. Why waste their futures here if you aren't going to do anything with them? The honest and best policy is always to tell people when they won't be needed.

Can't fault them for that.

I can fault them for not trying to develop players more, but if it is not in their DNA, then let it be. I did the numbers for you the other day. If you keep your senior roster at an average of 5 years tenure (a goal, not a reality with this team), then you only need 1-3 new players per year to replace the dearly departed. Assuming you sign one vet from abroad, that leaves 1, maybe 2 slots for the homegrown/draftee/trialists to fight for.

Sad to say but the #'s 25-30 slots are just cannon fodder. Better to develop a proper reserve academy and only bring a player up when they have a reasonable shot to make the senior squad. Doesn't mean the top 3-6 can't train on occaision with the senior team, but at least they would know where they stand.

#127
GMoney

GMoney

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,118 posts
  • Supports:New York Red Bulls

. I did the numbers for you the other day. If you keep your senior roster at an average of 5 years tenure (a goal, not a reality with this team), then you only need 1-3 new players per year to replace the dearly departed. Assuming you sign one vet from abroad, that leaves 1, maybe 2 slots for the homegrown/draftee/trialists to fight for.


You seem to be very interested in this topic and put a lot of thought into it.

Why don't you take a few weeks and get the actuals MLS player average tenure by team over the past 5 years? Start by ruling out expansion franchises because they'll have especailly high turnover.

Then you can get some actuals in there. Hey the Revolution average player tenure is 7-years, 5-years, 2-years whatever.

I think it's better to know what reality is than playing fantasy turnover in your head.

I know it's a lot of manaual work, but hey.......

The New York Red Bulls previously kicked around Major League Soccer as the MetroStars with limited success. But after transforming under a new banner in 2005, the Red Bulls have become a force to be reckoned with in the Eastern Conference. The club has made leaps of progress since its previous incarnation and now has its focus on bringing the league title to New York. Grab your New York Red Bulls soccer jersey and other gear here at MLSGear.com.


#128
Voice of Reason II

Voice of Reason II

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,065 posts

You seem to be very interested in this topic and put a lot of thought into it.

Why don't you take a few weeks and get the actuals MLS player average tenure by team over the past 5 years? Start by ruling out expansion franchises because they'll have especailly high turnover.

Then you can get some actuals in there. Hey the Revolution average player tenure is 7-years, 5-years, 2-years whatever.

I think it's better to know what reality is than playing fantasy turnover in your head.

I know it's a lot of manaual work, but hey.......

That excercise doesn't tell me anything I need to know.

Have we ever lacked for bodies? You can always fill a roster, big deal. Fill it with quality, that's different.

Why keep 5 guys you never have any intention of playing just so you can chop them at the end of next year to bring in another 5 guys you'll never play?

I did do the work if you remember, I looked at our draft picks in the top 20 against those picks 20 & above, over ten years which covered multiple coaches and multiple opportunities for cut, waived and traded players to find other teams. The reality is with a few exceptions (in fact 3 of the 4 were concentrated in a single draft), they either didn't make it at all or at best were spot fill ins no matter what team they ended up on. Those few "late" picks that stuck like Parke and Bradley? We knew they worth something in their first year with us.

You can believe we are ignoring all these hidden gems or you can come to see that we have had our fair share of good young players come through our system, but it has been trading the good ones away that has killed us.

If you think high turnover of the roster is a positive, please get off your butt and prove it to me. Also, please identify for me all that valuable talent we eliminated that had seen few if any minutes. But don't just point out a winner, show me all the names, because no team gets all the talent right. Show me all the losers versus all the winners so we can analyze it properly. I'm confident that you'll find that the odds are quite low for finding value in the draft after spot 20. The same goes for homegrowns. It is a big step up and just becasue we have trained them in our academy doesn't mean they will all cut it either.

Do You want Lindpere for 2 years or 5 years? Palsson if he is good for 2 years or 7 years? The next Brad Davis for 1 year or 10 years? Meara if he's great for 3 years or 12? Richards for 3 years or 7 years?

If your answer is the latter, then the longer you keep them the better continuity you have and the better chance for superior team chemistry (the same goes for the coaches). The longer you keep them, the fewer spots that open up for new players. It's the nature of the game. The Metro/RBNY franchise has gone through more players than any other original MLS. I don't need to finish that thought, do I?

Show me the money G if you want me to take your point of view. :cheers:

#129
GMoney

GMoney

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,118 posts
  • Supports:New York Red Bulls

That excercise doesn't tell me anything I need to know.

If you think high turnover of the roster is a positive, please get off your butt and prove it to me. Also, please identify for me all that valuable talent we eliminated that had seen few if any minutes. But don't just point out a winner, show me all the names, because no team gets all the talent right. Show me all the losers versus all the winners so we can analyze it properly. I'm confident that you'll find that the odds are quite low for finding value in the draft after spot 20. The same goes for homegrowns. It is a big step up and just becasue we have trained them in our academy doesn't mean they will all cut it either.

Do You want Lindpere for 2 years or 5 years? Palsson if he is good for 2 years or 7 years? The next Brad Davis for 1 year or 10 years? Meara if he's great for 3 years or 12? Richards for 3 years or 7 years?

Show me the money G if you want me to take your point of view. :cheers:


I think we have a little bit of a misunderstanding. When I quoted you on my previous post, I intentionally deleted the part about 25-30 on the roster. I was meaning to leave that part of the conversation out.

What you have called out a few times and I think your pasionate about is player tenure. That is what my last post was specifially referring to. I think you have an intruiging point/topic there. You then go to outline how many roster spots will be open annually if average tenure with RB was 7 years or 5 years, etc. Interesting.

That's where I was suggesting doing the research. That way we have a baseline. Check average palyer tenure of non-expansion teams over the past 5 years. Is average tenure 5 years, 3.5 years, 1 year, etc. I honesty don't know and don't want to guess.

Once you have a baseline, then I think you/we can figure out what a realistic tenure is in MLS. If avg tenure is currently 3 years, how do we get it to 5 years, etc. I think that's a great and interesting conversation.

But if avg. tenure is 1.2 years, then setting the bar at 5 years may not be realistic, that's all. Then you can fill in the data on how many spots are up for grabs each year and weather to invest them in youngsters, veterans, etc.

Of course I think having your best players here for the long haul is a good thing.

I hope I was a little more clear in this post.

The New York Red Bulls previously kicked around Major League Soccer as the MetroStars with limited success. But after transforming under a new banner in 2005, the Red Bulls have become a force to be reckoned with in the Eastern Conference. The club has made leaps of progress since its previous incarnation and now has its focus on bringing the league title to New York. Grab your New York Red Bulls soccer jersey and other gear here at MLSGear.com.


#130
Voice of Reason II

Voice of Reason II

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,065 posts

I think we have a little bit of a misunderstanding. When I quoted you on my previous post, I intentionally deleted the part about 25-30 on the roster. I was meaning to leave that part of the conversation out.

What you have called out a few times and I think your pasionate about is player tenure. That is what my last post was specifially referring to. I think you have an intruiging point/topic there. You then go to outline how many roster spots will be open annually if average tenure with RB was 7 years or 5 years, etc. Interesting.

That's where I was suggesting doing the research. That way we have a baseline. Check average palyer tenure of non-expansion teams over the past 5 years. Is average tenure 5 years, 3.5 years, 1 year, etc. I honesty don't know and don't want to guess.

Once you have a baseline, then I think you/we can figure out what a realistic tenure is in MLS. If avg tenure is currently 3 years, how do we get it to 5 years, etc. I think that's a great and interesting conversation.

But if avg. tenure is 1.2 years, then setting the bar at 5 years may not be realistic, that's all. Then you can fill in the data on how many spots are up for grabs each year and weather to invest them in youngsters, veterans, etc.

Of course I think having your best players here for the long haul is a good thing.

I hope I was a little more clear in this post.

Got it.

Couple points. The observation about tenure is really a life observation, it is a factor in so many organizations, but it is common and easy to follow in sports because it is such a statistic driven eneterprise, the number of players are relatively few (try doing this for Verizon or GE and you would burst), and the media pries out enough info so you can track it. Besides, people actually care.

The best teams in all sports try and keep their best players together for as long as possible. Some sports they move around more, but usually it is the free agency pay day that makes the players bolt rather than the other way around. We, of course, have done a miserable job following that paradigm, so it made me want to examine it deeper.

I arrived at 5 years (5.5 really) average tenure for us by taking the 20 man senior roster and saying 2 would stay 10 years, 2 would stay 9, 2 would stay 8, etc with the last two staying only one year. The mathematical average worked out to be 5.5, so I didn't choose 5, it chose itself by my methodology. But 5 seemd like a reasonable goal. That of course produced the two additions per year to match the two departures.

The other way I came at it was examining our draft history. That is more real world and empirical, but you end up at the same conclusion. If you try and keep your better players for a lot of years, just not that many spots open up for the newer players.

Given that we are a feeder league and the Euro poachers will constantly be plucking away our better youngsters (ream, Jozy, etc), maybe 5 years is an unrealistic number, but it is still a good goal.

#131
Brian.MLS

Brian.MLS

    RIP MetroStars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,475 posts
  • Location:Sparta
  • Supports:Metro/NYRBII
Ryan Maduro is supposedly still training with the team. There may still be more signings...
2013, 2015 & 2018 Supporters Shield Winners
 
@CurseofCaricola

#132
iced1776

iced1776

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,342 posts
  • Supports:NY Red Bulls, FC Barcelona
I thought we heard Giorgi was looking pretty good earlier in the preseason, what happened there?

#133
Metrosct

Metrosct

    First Team

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 714 posts
  • Supports:Metrostars

I thought we heard Giorgi was looking pretty good earlier in the preseason, what happened there?

However, he didn't play much in the preseason games.

#134
Voice of Reason II

Voice of Reason II

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,065 posts

I thought we heard Giorgi was looking pretty good earlier in the preseason, what happened there?

Probably others looked better. Even without Rodgers, he had Henry, Cooper, Agudelo, and Hertzog ahead and had to nudge out Angulo and Arteaga. Tough competition.

That said, maybe he and Maduro are still in negotiation mode? If he didn't show better than Hertzog, Arteaga and Angulo does it matter?

#135
iced1776

iced1776

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,342 posts
  • Supports:NY Red Bulls, FC Barcelona

Probably others looked better. Even without Rodgers, he had Henry, Cooper, Agudelo, and Hertzog ahead and had to nudge out Angulo and Arteaga. Tough competition.

That said, maybe he and Maduro are still in negotiation mode? If he didn't show better than Hertzog, Arteaga and Angulo does it matter?


I'm not sure why I thought this, but I was under the impression that Backe was going to use him on the left wing instead of as an out and out striker. Did he play there at all this preseason or am I just plain making stuff up? Figured maybe Backe planned on using him as a backup for Lindpere like he did with Da Luz last season, but if he's just going to be the 7th striker on the depth chart then he wouldn't make much of a difference.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users